Consider the OOS Conservation Fund for end-of-year giving

Consider the OOS Conservation Fund for end-of-year giving

“We will put your money to good use!” – Bil Kerrigan, Chair, OOS Conservation Committee”

The Conservation Committee of the Ohio Ornithological Society is dedicated to helping people like you help birds. Here are just a few of the projects we have supported in the last few years with dollars from OOS memberships and other donations:

  • Kestrel and Tree Swallow next boxes on the Reclaimed Surface-mined lands around The Wilds
  • A high-tech Motus wildlife tracking station along Lake Erie
  • Support for a volunteer day to remove invasive plants from important bird habitat in a Preble County Park.
  • Supplies for an ongoing Herring Gull banding project on Lake Erie.
  • Purple Martin nesting gourds in Delaware County.
  • Construction of Chimney Swift Towers in Lorain, Cuyahoga, and Muskingum
    County
  • Prothonotary Warbler Research at the Black Swamp Bird Observatory

All OOS officers and committee members donate their time, and the groups we support depend upon volunteers to carry out their projects. Just last weekend I visited volunteer members of the Friends of Dillon State Park, who were busy constructing a Chimney Swift Tower they will install on
park grounds in the coming months. The OOS Conservation Committee covered the costs of the supplies; all other expenses will be covered by the volunteers and Park staff. Every penny you give goes directly to helping the birds of Ohio.

Please consider a donation to the OOS Conservation Fund, the Youth Education Fund, the General Education Fund, or the Doreene Linzell Fund

OOS Seeks Nominees and Volunteers for Open Positions

OOS Seeks Nominees and Volunteers for Open Positions

OOS Seeks Nominees and Volunteers for Open Positions

Several key positions for the OOS (Ohio Ornithological Society) are currently open or soon will be open as leaders and volunteers move on from the club.  In response, the OOS Board continues to seek volunteers/nominees from within both membership and the Ohio birding community who are willing and able to fill those roles for the continuation and success of the OOS.  Roles on the Board that are opening include the President, Vice President and Recording Secretary as well as Regional Director positions for the Northeast, Northwest, and the Central regions.  Operational roles that are open and require some amount of knowledge or experience include Membership Coordinator and Webmaster.

The Board has spent several months seeking nominees for President as well as the two operational positions.  While the other open positions are important, finding candidates for the President, Membership Coordinator and Webmaster are critical to the ongoing operations of the Society.  The annual Membership Meeting for 2022 is being scheduled for November 19, 2022 in the Toledo area (details will be shared soon) and our fervent hope is to have strong candidates nominated for all our open Board positions by that point.  The operational positions may be filled at any time.

If you or someone you know is interested in any of these roles, nominations or recommendations may be shared with our Volunteer Coordinator Kisa Weeman (kweeman96@gmail.com) or Executive Secretary Sue Evanoff (bird2xs@outlook.com).  In addition, questions regarding these roles and their related duties may be directed to either Kisa or Sue.  Without candidates for these roles, more significant changes may be required to the organization.  Our hope is that strong candidates will be identified securing a healthy future for the OOS.  We welcome your input through this transition.

Ohio Bird Records Committee Summary 2021

Ohio Bird Records Committee Summary 2021

Ohio Bird Records Committee Summary 2021

The Ohio Bird Records Committee (OBRC) had a productive year in 2021. Due to a complicated series of circumstances, the committee had not functioned effectively for several years. Late in 2020, OBRC founder Robert Harlan asked Jon Cefus if he was willing to take the role of secretary in an effort to try to get the committee functioning again. Jon Cefus agreed to take the role of secretary with Robert Harlan in the role of vice-secretary to help facilitate the process and provide guidance about procedures and adherence to the OBRC bylaws.

The membership of the committee in 2021 included Jon Cefus (Secretary), Robert Harlan (Vice Secretary), Jen Brumfield, Tom Kemp, Steve Landes, Ben Morrison, Steve Schafer, Ben Warner, and Brian Wulker.

The first task for the secretary and vice secretary was to determine if the current members of the committee were willing to continue their tenure. All the members agreed.

The second task was to prioritize what records should be reviewed as there was a growing number that had not been addressed. The secretary and vice secretary deemed that new state records in Ohio should be the first priority. The second priority was to review records that would have an impact on the presence of rare species in Ohio since the last publication of The Ohio Bird Records Committee Annotated Checklist of the Birds of Ohio in 2008, as there is intent to publish an updated edition of that checklist in 2022.

Integral to achieving the above goals, it was determined that some emendations to the OBRC bylaws would be necessary. A proposal was put forth to emend the Bylaws of the OBRC to better reflect recent trends in observations of birds in Ohio and to help the records committee work more efficiently. In the past, the threshold for a species to be removed from the review species list was that the accepted record frequency was fewer than TWO records per year for the most recent 10-year period. A vote was taken, and the following emendation accepted by the committee establishing the criteria of an Ohio review species as:

“Review List criteria are as follows:
(a) Any species for which there is no Accepted record for the state is automatically a Review List species;
(b) Any species for which the Accepted frequency is less than ONE record per year (for the most recent ten year period) is automatically a Review List species;
(c) Any species not falling within the above two categories may be added to the Review List, after relevant discussion, if a majority of the Committee so agrees.”

The first batch of records to review was sent to the OBRC in March 2021. This batch of 20 records represented 10 new potential state records, as well as several 2nd and 3rd state records. The committee unanimously voted to accept all 10 of the new state records, bringing the official list of accepted species in Ohio to 443 and a species pair. The 10 species added to the list of OBRC accepted records in Ohio are:
Black-chinned Hummingbird, Limpkin, Slaty-backed Gull, Brown Booby, White-tailed Kite, Tropical Kingbird, Gray Kingbird, Chestnut-collared Longspur, Brewer’s Sparrow, and Hooded Oriole.

The emendation to the bylaws that set the standard for what constitutes a review species for the OBRC (see above) resulted in 22 species being removed from the review species list in 2021. The 22 species are:
Black-bellied Whistling Duck, Trumpeter Swan (a separate vote covered below), White-winged Dove, Yellow Rail, Piping Plover, Ruff*, Black-headed Gull, California Gull, Pacific Loon, Neotropic Cormorant, Brown Pelican, Glossy Ibis, White-faced Ibis, Mississippi Kite, Loggerhead Shrike*, Fish Crow, Cave Swallow*, Varied Thrush, Smith’s Longspur, Harris’s Sparrow, Kirtland’s Warbler, and Painted Bunting.

In the list above, the (*) indicates that the committee voted to place that species, which had met the threshold for removal from the review species list, back on to the list of review species in Ohio. For Ruff, the rationale was that it remains a rare bird in the American Birding Association Area in North America. Loggerhead Shrike populations continue to decline in our part of the country. Cave Swallows are generally seen over Lake Erie at long distances in the late fall/early winter, presenting challenges getting to a definitive identification.

The OBRC continued to vote on batches of review species through 2021. In the end, the committee voted on 6 batches of review species. The batches added up to reviewing 127 records. These records were gleaned from 2 sources. The first source is the OBRC portal provided by the Ohio Ornithological Society’s website. Those records were sent to the OBRC by individuals who saw a bird and sent written documentation about their sightings. If needed, supporting documentation (e.g. photos, audio recordings) was sent to bolster the report. The second source are reports generated in eBird by observers using that citizen science tool. Many eBird users take photographs or make recordings of their sightings, particularly of rare birds, which are often review species in Ohio. In order to help facilitate the work of the secretary at gleaning these review species reports, the team of eBird reviewers in Ohio are asked to find the best reports in their respective areas of review species and submit them to the secretary to be entered into batches of records to be reviewed. The trend seems to be that birders are using less paper submissions of review species to the OBRC (and presumably other state records committees), so finding ways to get reports via sources like eBird will be essential going forward.

Of the above 127 records reviewed by the OBRC in 2021, 123 were accepted by the committee votes. 3 records were not accepted. 1 record was placed into recirculation status and remains unresolved as of the generation of this report. The committee will continue discussion about this record in 2022.

In addition to casting votes on the above records, the OBRC also met the goal of taking up the question of whether to remove Trumpeter Swan (TRUS) from the list of review species in Ohio. After gathering information regarding the status of TRUS in Ohio historically, its introduction to the state in 1996, and its breeding status/presence since that year, the committee voted unanimously (9-0) to remove it from the list of review species in Ohio. The evidence is clear that TRUS has successfully established a presence in Ohio. A more detailed report discussing the full rationale was published on the OBRC Facebook page and posted on the Ohio Birds email listserv. An article is also being published in the Ohio Cardinal, the repository of Ohio’s birding records.

In regard to the coming publication of a new Ohio Bird Records Committee Annotated Checklist of the Birds of Ohio, author Robert Harlan reported to the secretary on December 2, 2021 that his work gathering the most up to date data for that project was complete and he, with a great deal of assistance from his wife Sandy, had completed the bar charts for that publication. The secretary will now find someone who can take that data and the bar charts and put them into a format for publishing as a physical handbook. The goal is to have this handbook available in the spring of 2022. The Ohio Ornithological Society agreed several years ago to pay the costs of having this new annotated checklist printed.

The final business attended to in 2021 was to find replacements for the 2 committee members whose terms are ending at the end of this calendar year. Tom Kemp and Ben Warner have both contributed a great deal to the committee and brought their experience and knowledge to bear on all the committee’s endeavors. The committee hopes that they will both return to serve in future years. Thank you, Tom and Ben! Nominees were presented to replace these 2 coming vacancies. Alex Eberts and Matt Kemp were nominated by committee members and a vote was taken to accept them as the newest OBRC members. The OBRC voted unanimously to accept their nominations. Thank you to Alex and Matt for their willingness to join the OBRC!

The Ohio Bird Records Committee looks forward to continuing our work in 2022.

Jon Cefus
Secretary, OBRC

Status of Trumpeter Swans in Ohio

Status of Trumpeter Swans in Ohio

RECENT OHIO BIRD RECORDS COMMITTEE ACTION REGARDING THE STATUS OF TRUMPETER SWAN IN OHIO

In October 2021, the nine member peer-review panel Ohio Bird Records Committee (OBRC) voted unanimously to remove Trumpeter Swan from it’s list of Review Species in Ohio, determining that the species is now firmly established here, and is likely to remain as an Ohio resident.   Details of this decision, the thought process behind it, and the current status of Trumpeter Swan in Ohio, follows.

The true status of Trumpeter Swan has long perplexed naturalists in Ohio, but we are not alone…the same is true throughout much of eastern North America.  Since the earliest days of journaling and record keeping, the species has been the subject of conflicting reports, but little hard evidence, across this large area.  For thorough  and well-researched background information, prepared in large part for this Committee years ago by the late Bill Whan, see the articles linked at the end of this review.

In short, there is no direct evidence which indicates that Trumpeter Swan ever nested in Ohio historically, although it certainly was at least a rare migrant through the 1800s.

Trumpeter Swan is already Accepted on the Ohio list (based on historical data) by the OBRC, and has likewise long been accepted by earlier authorities.  This Committee recognizes the last wild Trumpeter Swan in Ohio as being shot in Jackson County in April, 1900.  In this case, “wild” pertains to an individual emanating from a naturally occurring population.  Due to its nearly 100-year absence as a wild species in Ohio, Trumpeter Swan has therefore held a place on the OBRC’s Review List, and received special attention, since the Committee was formed in 1991.

In 1996, however, the Ohio Division of Wildlife, in cooperation with other partners, and in the pattern of other state and provincial wildlife agencies nearby, introduced Trumpeter Swan into Ohio with the intention that it would become a permanent part of Ohio’s avifauna.  This action, of course, added a layer of complexity which affects our abilities to discern the potential “wildness” of Trumpeters seen here…as numbers of Ohio-introduced Trumpeters, their progeny, and introduced and reintroduced emigrants continue to increase here, our ability to detect and discern birds potentially from naturally occurring populations continues to decrease to the point of becoming practically unachievable.  

Nonetheless, the OBRC has retained Trumpeter Swan on the Review List until now, in hopes of gathering data on any potentially wild individuals, but also more realistically to gather information on introduced populations as they might fare locally after direct human intervention had ended.  Over 25 years have now passed since introduction efforts began here in Ohio, and patterns of occurrence have emerged.

Therefore, it seemed appropriate for this Committee to reassess the data concerning the current status of Trumpeter Swan in Ohio, and to vote whether to retain or remove the species from the Review List.  A vote to remove would result in the species no longer receiving special treatment by the Committee.

We have gathered data from numerous sources, including publications by the Ohio Division of Wildlife, eBird, the monthly bird census at Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge, The Ohio Cardinal, and numerous knowledgeable individuals.  We are especially grateful for the tireless work done by former OBRC member Dan Sanders on the Committee’s behalf, with his careful determinations of nesting successes of swans across the state.

 

OHIO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RELEASE EFFORTS

According to Laura Kearns, Wildlife Biologist with the Ohio Division of Wildlife, 15 Trumpeter Swans were released at Magee Marsh Wildlife Area in 1996.  Additional releases occurring from 1997 to 2003 placed birds at a total of 11 Ohio sites considered to be suitable wetlands, with approximately 150 birds being released in total.  By 2003, 15 breeding pairs statewide fulfilled goals which allowed for a discontinuation of release efforts by the state, although other licensed propagators still exist locally.

Monitoring continued, and by 2013 fulfilled goals (including 35 breeding pairs) allowed Trumpeter Swan to be shifted from the state’s Endangered List to it’s Threatened List, according to ODOW guidelines.  By July 2014, the ODOW tallied 246 individuals statewide, with nearly 140 cygnets being produced in that year alone, and with new locations being utilized by nesting pairs.

Numbers continue to increase, according to the ODOW.  By 2020, 98 pairs were surveyed statewide with 235 cygnets being raised.  Over the previous five years, the state averaged a 14.7% increase in raised cygnets, but in 2020, that number increased to 19.9%.  The total population of Trumpeters in Ohio in 2020 was estimated at 650 individuals, and in 2021, nesting pairs have surpassed the 100 mark.  Nesting range has continued to increase as well, although peak numbers still reside in the northwestern Ohio Lake Erie marshes. 

Also in 2020, 12 Ohio Trumpeters were fitted with GPS-tracking neck collars, and their movements, as well as the movements of over 100 other swans collared in five midwestern states and Manitoba, are now viewable online at <https://trumpeterswan.netlify.app/locations.html>.  Although no ingress or egress of GPS-collared swans has been noted for Ohio (rather, only short-distance tracked movements have been noted here), longer distance movements in other areas indicate that given a larger sample size, movements into and out of Ohio could certainly be occurring (in fact, they are occurring– the Ottawa NWR monthly census has identified two Trumpeters, in 2019 and 2021, with unique wing tag markings establishing origins in Ontario, Canada). 

According to the attainment of ODOW management plan goals, Trumpeter Swan is now eligible to be removed from the state’s Threatened List, although this has not yet occurred.

 

DATA FROM THE OTTAWA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE MONTHLY BIRD CENSUS 

This census covers a prescribed route, and is run monthly year-round, through the marshes of Ottawa NWR in Ottawa and Lucas counties.  Observers pay special attention to swan numbers of all three local species, and since 2007 have recorded any unique markings visible in the Trumpeters they see.  As such, these surveys provide valuable year-round data, as compiled by the late Ed Pierce and Doug Vogus, who graciously has provided us with the information presented here. 

One nesting pair of swans, “74M” and “1A2”, has been present there since at least 2007 (and are therefore at least 15 years old), all indicative of the nesting potential for this long-lived species in preferred habitat.  Except for an outlier found in 1991, Trumpeters were first detected on the census in 1996, the first year of introduction at adjacent Magee Marsh.  Since then, the species has been found there on almost every monthly survey date. 

We can conveniently break down the census numbers as follows:  during the 5-year period of 1996-2000, a total of 149 swans were tallied.  In the next 5-year period, 2001-2005, 470 swans were tallied; from 2006-2010, 1032 were tallied; from 2011-2015, 1564 were tallied; and from 2016-2020, 6470 were tallied. 

An average of 30 swans were tallied per year during the period of 1996-2000; 2001-2005 averaged 94 per year; 2006-2010 averaged 206 per year; and 2011-2015 increased the average substantially to 313 per year.  Not until the 2016-2020 period did numbers skyrocket, averaging 1294 per year. 

The maximum number of Trumpeters on any date was 408 during January 2020. 

These numbers very clearly show an increase in Trumpeter Swans at Ottawa NWR, and parallel ODOW increases noted above.

 

DATA FROM THE OHIO CARDINAL AND EBIRD 

From information compiled by Editor Craig Caldwell from eBird and other sources, we can break down data for the past 10 years since 2011.  Observers in an average of 15 Ohio counties per season submitted Trumpeter Swan reports for 2011; by 2014, the average was 23 counties per season; by 2017, the average was 26 counties per season; by 2020, the average was up to 33 counties per season.  For the Winter 2020/21 and Spring 2021 seasons alone, an average of 49 counties reported Trumpeters.  Although an increased number of observers may account for at least a portion of this increase, it also parallels ODOW and ONWR census trajectories, and presumably indicates expanding range necessitated by increasing numbers.

 

COMMENTS FROM VOTING MEMBERS 

Committee members were asked to comment on their voting decisions.  The following comments are excerpts taken from the votes of various OBRC members: 

1)  “The issue of Trumpeter Swan has long been confusing for the public.  It is now very well established here and should be countable without attempting to determine where it originated from.”

2)  “OBRC’s initial intent of having Trumpeter Swan on the Review species list to gather info on potentially wild individuals seen in Ohio and to gather data on how introduced populations would fare after their introduction by humans was a sound policy.  It seems unlikely that the OBRC could have foreseen how the numbers of Trumpeter Swans in Ohio would expand over the next 30 years from 1991 when it was added to the Committee’s list of review species….We then have a responsibility to inform and educate Ohio’s birding community about our decision and how it affects whether they can add Trumpeter Swan to their various lists in Ohio.”

3)  “This is about a sustained, viable, and expanding population.”

4)  “It is clear that Trumpeter Swans in Ohio are here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future.  It is also clear…that it is now close to impossible to determine if any of the swans in Ohio are truly wild strays and not from the introduced population.”

5)  “I vote to remove Trumpeter Swan from the OBRC Review List…it can be hard to predict how a species’ populations will change over time.  But that’s perfectly okay.  To paraphrase a saying, you go with the data you have, not the data you wish you had.  If the situation changes, the question can be revisited.”

6)  “Simply put, they have been here for more than twenty years…No longer is this species being supplemented by additional release efforts (for some time now) and they don’t rely on humans to continue surviving in the wild.”

7)   “Voting [to remove the species from the Review List] is difficult for me since I never approved of the process that brought them here.  So I will give the victory to the vibrant species, rather than the process.  They are here to stay.”

 

ON COUNTABILITY IN OHIO 

The issue of countability of Trumpeter Swan in Ohio has come up frequently over the years while the species has resided on the Review List.  Although it may frequently be viewed as determining countability, the OBRC does not directly serve this function.  Rather, according to OBRC Bylaws, the Committee 1) endorses records it determines to be suitable, based on the strength of available evidence, to be included in the historical record; 2) provides a means by which records can gain universal acceptance as scientific data; and 3) establishes standards of observation and reporting against which observers may compare their own techniques. 

So, in reality, the Committee provides guidance on which birds it considers countable, but the actual determination to count is done by birders alone. 

Birders have treated the countability of Trumpeter Swan in Ohio in a variety of ways.  Some have waited to count Trumpeters for their Ohio lists until the OBRC determined that the species was established here.  Others have waited to count the species based on interpretations of American Birding Association listing rules (although these rules have changed over the years and are not always easily interpreted).  See for instance <www.aba.org/aba-area-reintroduced-indigenous-species/>, which seems to indicate that the ABA believes that Trumpeter Swan should already be countable in Ohio despite confusion over the matter of whether the species is truly indigenous here.  Undoubtedly most birders using eBird to record their observations already count Trumpeter here because the platform allows them to be counted.  Of course, many birders and nature enthusiasts see a Trumpeter Swan and automatically count it, without considering any background information. Others have simply counted the species using their own inclinations and judgement.   

With this vote, the Committee acknowledges the establishment of Trumpeter Swan in Ohio and hopes that the decision to remove the species from the Review List will also remove any questions of countability here. 

Although differences of opinion exist regarding whether introduction efforts here were appropriate, one cannot overlook the increasing presence of Trumpeter Swans in Ohio’s wetlands.  Further study is certainly warranted, if only to verify future population numbers, but more importantly to better establish how the presence of Trumpeters affects native species, both competing for the same limited tax dollars, and dwelling in the same precious habitats.  

 

For the OBRC,

Rob Harlan, Vice Secretary

 

For background information, see: 

Did Trumpeter Swans Ever Breed in Ohio?

by Bill Whan (2000)

<www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~insrisg/nature/whan_essay.htm> and a 2007 update

<www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~insrisg/nature/WhanTS07.htm> 

Did Trumpeter Swans Ever Breed in Eastern North America?

by Bill Whan and Gerry Rising (2001?)

<www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~insrisg/nature/swans/html>

Plover Patrol Effervescence

Plover Patrol Effervescence

OOS Northeast Regional Director, Diana Steele, monitors newly banded piping plover chicks

during a volunteer shift 7/15. “PIPL HQ” is visible in the background. Photo by Mandy Roberts.

A July 10 New York Times article, “There’s a Specific Kind of Joy We’ve Been Missing,” finally put a name to the nearly inexplicable joie de vivre that I’ve been feeling lately: “collective effervescence.” As writer Adam Grant explains, “peak happiness lies mostly in collective activity.” During the pandemic, the synchrony we feel when we come together to share a purpose, dance in rhythm, or laugh with strangers, was nearly entirely absent from our lives. I couldn’t name it, but felt the lack of connection deeply.

The opportunity for the birding community of northern Ohio to unite together around a common purpose arose suddenly and without premonition. Coinciding with the lifting of coronavirus restrictions in Ohio in early June, a pair of piping plovers began nesting on Ohio’s North Coast for the first time in more than eight decades. Few people alive today remember the last time a piping plover family successfully raised chicks in Ohio. Undeterred by this history, a pair of plovers set up housekeeping at Maumee Beach State Park in late May, and on June 1, laid their first egg on the inland beach.

Piping Plover at Maumee Bay State Park – Photo provided by Luke Chapman

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, and Black Swamp Bird Observatory sprang into action to cordon off a protected area and train and muster an army of volunteers, dubbed the “Plover Patrol.” A disused concession stand became “PIPL HQ.”

As a writer who deliberately keeps a light schedule in order to be flexible for just such opportunities as this, I dove in to plover monitoring at full speed. I was prepared to be delighted by the tiny plovers as they ran up and down the beach, and even imagined what it might be like to watch the antics of the chicks—who when they are first hatch look like toasted marshmallows running around on pretzel sticks.

The famous Piping Plover chicks – Photos provided by Mandy Roberts and Mark Hainen

But I wasn’t prepared for the “collective effervescence” that arose among the Plover Patrol as we—many of us previously strangers to each other—came together around the common purpose of keeping the plovers safe and monitoring their behavior.

It may seem silly, but I was nearly moved to tears by the calm professionalism of my new friends as we learned the ropes of scientific note-taking and walkie-talkie operation together, joyfully brainstorming and problem-solving on the fly. With the pandemic easing and fears of contagion waning, sliding into this shared rhythm was not just joyous but breathtaking.

Giggling together over the chick that could never seem to get under the parent to brood, or bounced off in a back flip, grew into giddy hysterical laughter. Each morning checking in to the Facebook group to learn the 6 a.m. plover count became a shared ritual. And there were hugs, lots of hugs.

The innumerable volunteers keep track of the eight daily two-hour shifts on a shared Google doc. As the hatch date approached and after all four chicks successfully emerged on July 1, the number of volunteers on each shift kept doubling from two, to four, and then eight. One magnanimous soul, Jack Burris, took over the monumental task of coordinating all of the others, freeing BSBO staff to concentrate on the jobs they already had. Beyond that, the collective is self-organized on each shift.

Diana Steele, Mandy Roberts, and Karen Zach monitoring the Piping Plover family

If at least two of these chicks fledge, they will increase the average over the number needed to sustain this critically endangered population. If three or four fledge, our little plovers will have succeeded beyond expectation and play a role in potentially expanding the population beyond the current estimated 75 breeding pairs, numbering barely 200 birds throughout all of the Great Lakes.

Even if this pair never returns to Ohio—but of course, I hope they will—this collective joy has lifted the pandemic gloom from all of our hearts. As Grant writes, “You can feel depressed and anxious alone, but it’s rare to laugh alone or love alone. Joy shared is joy sustained.”

Nocturnal Flight Calls

Nocturnal Flight Calls

The night before birding on a given morning during migration is spent excitedly talking about the predicted migration with my friends. Messages are exchanged on anything from wind patterns to Cornell’s BirdCast and predicting which species we think will finally make it to our area for the first time this season. Then we all head to bed, excited for the migrants that await us in the morning.

Some of these nights, there is enough activity overhead that I try to listen to what birds are flying over. When it’s quiet, you can hear faint chips overhead as birds pass by. With a microphone, you’re able to hear them much clearer and even identify them to species! These “nocturnal flight calls” provide a whole new insight and level of excitement to birding in migration!

I clearly remember sitting in the audience at one of the Ohio Young Birders Club conferences. The keynote speaker was telling us how he was able to listen to the birds migrating overhead each night and identify them to species by call or spectrogram. I was no older than middle school at the time, but it stuck with me. I knew someday I wanted to be able to do that myself, and see what birds migrated over my house on a given night.

This spring, I decided it was finally time to make the dream come true. I’d seen a lot of eBird lists coming in with recordings marked “NFC”. These “NFC’s,” or Nocturnal Flight Calls, are a series of typically short notes given by birds during migration. Many are high-pitched and similar enough that they can’t be identified to species. However, some, such as Yellow-billed Cuckoo, give calls similar to those you would hear on a typical summer morning. Thankfully, I had a few friends who had experience with these identifications, and others who were also trying to learn. This allowed us to work through IDs and technical difficulties together.

A very busy road runs behind my house here in Clermont County, making hearing overhead birds difficult at times. Once it was late enough at night, usually around midnight, I would go set out my microphone. In my case, this was a sensitive directional microphone in a 5-gallon bucket, allowing sound to be funneled into the mic. The cable was usually run 30 feet or so over to my computer, where I had headphones plugged in and Cornell’s Raven Lite software open. Some people run their NFC mics all night and go through recordings the next morning to see what calls they detect. Since I am just getting started with this, I chose to run the mic only as long as I could be awake, and listen to the calls in real time. This allowed me to learn more in the moment. As I watched the spectrogram of the live recording coming in, I would save just short segments as I heard them.

The area my house is in is relatively urban, just adding significance to the variety and numbers of species passing overhead. There is little habitat anywhere in the county for some of the species I observed to even stop, making it even more exciting to hear them!

Within my first hour of running the microphone, I was already amazed at the diversity overhead. April 23rd was still early enough in the season to detect earlier migrants, such as sparrows. My NFCs were mostly Savannah, Chipping, and White-throated Sparrows. Some of the exciting surprises were difficult birds for Clermont County, such as Grasshopper Sparrow, Pine Warbler, and Great Egret! I was very excited after this night and couldn’t wait to see what came later in the season.

The call of a Chipping Sparrow is a “U” shape, often with a second line in the middle (as shown in the second call) or sometimes a single “U” as shown in the first.

A few days later on April 28th, my sister, Cassidy, and I decided to try the microphone again. Due to less road noise in the middle of the week, we were able to start as early as 10:45pm. As I went outside to set up the microphone, I heard a Spotted Sandpiper calling overhead and knew that this was going to be a fun night to listen. A few unidentified warblers called too distantly to confidently ID, but still had me excited to see the species change in such a short time. Sparrow numbers were significantly lower, and thrushes had begun to pick up. Hermit and Veery both were recorded. The most exciting finds of the night were the Least Sandpiper (a very fun yard bird) as well as THREE Virginia Rails, one of my most wanted birds for Clermont County in general.

Four faint “Kek” calls of a Virginia Rail. They have one of the lower calls I heard over my house. They were easier to hear than the computer picked up.

The third (and unfortunately final) time I ran the microphone this season just happened to be the craziest night yet! May 18th was just after the main peak in migration for the Cincinnati area, and I had no idea what to expect. I only had an hour to run the microphone before bed, because I wanted to get early for one of the last big pushes of birds in the area. I went outside to set up the mic, and within the first 30 seconds I heard 8 Swainson’s Thrushes overhead. Once recording started, Swainson’s Thrushes were calling once every 15 seconds, resulting in a call rate of nearly 250 birds per hour! A number of Veery and Gray-cheeked Thrushes called as well. Other surprises included 45 Indigo Buntings, Blue Grosbeak, Grasshopper Sparrow, Green Heron, and two Yellow-billed Cuckoos!

One of the almost 250 Swainson’s Thrushes that passed over my house in the hour I ran the microphone! The thrushes all have pretty distinct calls while migrating.

Learning to identify these calls wasn’t easy. I spent a lot of time on both oldbird.org and eBird’s Macaulay Library, as well as texting friends for help. It took time to familiarize myself with the most common calls and learn to help classify them into families. There are certain common patterns to recognize, you must note the time and frequency of every call, and have patience while browsing other samples. These were the most beneficial ways for me to learn. It may be a bit of a learning curve, but was a very fun new way to experience migration. When birds are migrating overhead, you never know what could fly over your yard!

I was able to record a Least Sandpiper during the April 29, 2020 session below.

eBird Checklist - April 23, 2020

This checklist features 16 species, 15 with audio recordings. Click Here

eBird Checklist - April 29, 2020

This checklist features 10 species, 8 with audio recordings. Click Here

eBird Checklist - May 18, 2020

This checklist features 14 species, 13 with audio recordings. Click Here